Free-exercise disputes begin elsewhere. Ask whether government has burdened sincere religious exercise and whether the rule is neutral and generally applicable. Targeting religion, favoring comparable secular conduct, or operating a discretionary exemption system ordinarily leads to strict scrutiny; a genuinely evenhanded rule ordinarily receives more deference under the constitutional minimum. RFRA may impose a stronger statutory test on federal action.

A single fact pattern can raise both clauses. Equal access for a private religious club may be permitted by the Establishment Clause and required by speech or free-exercise principles. Likewise, a public employee's private religious expression does not become government-sponsored merely because it occurs near government work; attribution, coercion, audience, and context matter. The apparent tension diminishes once private choice is separated from official sponsorship.

On an exam, choose the framework from the challenged government action rather than from the mere presence of religion. For official prayer, ask about sponsorship and coercion. For exclusion from a neutral benefit, ask about religious discrimination. For an incidental burden, test neutrality, general applicability, comparable exceptions, and any applicable statute.

Video lesson: Freedom of Religion: Crash Course Government and Politics #24